Archived: Heritage Care Centre

Updated 16 December 2014

We inspected Heritage Care Centre on 7 August 2014. This was an unannounced inspection which meant the staff and provider did not know we would be visiting. The inspection was led by an inspector who was accompanied by a specialist advisor and an expert by experience . The specialist advisor had experience of nursing care. The expert had experience of older people’s care services.

Before we visited the home we checked the information that we held about the service including notifications sent to us informing us of significant events that occurred at the service, and any safeguarding alerts raised. The provider also completed a Provider Information Return (PIR) This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. The service met the regulations we inspected at their last inspection which took place on 9 January 2014.

During our inspection we observed how the staff interacted with people who used the service. We looked at how people were supported during their lunch. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We also reviewed twelve care records, staff training records, and records relating to the management of the service such as audits and policies.

We spoke with nine people who used the service and four relatives who were visiting on the day of the inspection. We also spoke with the registered manager, the regional manager, the activities co-ordinator, kitchen staff and eight care workers. We contacted healthcare professionals involved in caring for people who used the service, including social workers, speech and language therapists and physiotherapists.

This report was written during the testing phase of our new approach to regulating adult social care services. After this testing phase, inspection of consent to care and treatment, restraint, and practice under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) was moved from the key question ‘Is the service safe?’ to ‘Is the service effective?’

The ratings for this location were awarded in October 2014. They can be directly compared with any other service we have rated since then, including in relation to consent, restraint, and the MCA under the ‘Effective’ section. Our written findings in relation to these topics, however, can be read in the ‘Is the service safe’ sections of this report.

Updated 16 December 2014

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) which looks at the overall quality of the service.

There was a registered manager at the service at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider.

Heritage Care Centre is a care home for up to 72 people requiring nursing or personal care. It is split over three floors and has separate units for people with dementia. The ground floor has two elderly units, Cavell and Dalton. The first floor has two dementia units, Franciscan and Rectory. Each unit has a unit manager overseeing the care needs for people using the service. The third floor has a sensory room, hairdressing room, the laundry and staff room. There is an outdoor space for people to enjoy. All bedrooms are single occupancy with ensuite facilities. At the time of our inspection there were 68 people living at the home.

The home was welcoming, in an excellent state of repair and had a clean, airy smell. People using the service were happy and settled. They told us they felt safe, enjoyed living at the home and were treated well by staff. They complimented the food and told us that staff respected their wishes, including any religious or cultural needs. People were able to leave the home if they wanted, unless staff felt it was unsafe to do so. The provider followed appropriate guidance on Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), carried out risk assessments and involved people or their next of kin when making decisions which restricted people's movements.

Care records were updated by staff on a regular basis. The wishes of people using the service and their next of kin were recorded and taken into consideration when delivering care. Healthcare professionals such as GPs and community nurses were involved in people’s care and provided guidance for staff at the home.

Staff were familiar with the needs of people using the service. We observed staff interacting with people in a friendly, relaxed manner. Staff understood what was meant by treating people with dignity and respect. A range of group and individual activities were available for people. We observed some of these taking place and saw that people were engaged and enjoyed them.

The home was managed well and staff told us they felt valued. Training that was relevant to the work that staff were doing was provided and regular staff supervision took place.

The provider followed best practice guidance when delivering care.  The management team strove for excellence by following best practice and worked in partnership with other organisations to make sure they were providing a high quality service for people.